Finally, as if that weren't enough here is some sloppily presented writing, typical of the article as a whole, that forces us to "guess" which book is under discussion:

<<"To shed some light on the 23rd game Lev dug out a little-known work by Botvinnik which contains the world champion's notes on the game. The book by Botvinnik was published after his death by his nephew Igor Botvinnik. You can replay the game and the analysis on our Javascript board given below.">

I actually have this <Bronstein> book, and it took me a minute or two to identify which book they allude to.>

This is the book they seem to think should be left mysterious to readers of their so-called article:

OK. I'm just swinging at anything that moves.

It's life blood, my dear <Tim>.

I want to quote you, but since I can't remember what you said I'll have to paraphrase.

As you said to that jackanapes back in the day,

<"Without such monkeyshines, we'd be like... well, you.">

Do you remember posting that to the guy asking you why you were disrespecting the names of Grandmasters on one of the live game pages?

Here is the last line of the latest email I received (no, really) from OUR MAN IN HAVANA who is hard at work fixing "bugs" in our HTML template for Game Collection: WCC: Steinitz-Gunsberg 1890-1891

"So be it."

Thanks for that new Johnny material! I have added it to my persona Johnny folder, and I will also add it to one of the Mirrors "for safe keeping."

I have another question. <Chessical> has posted new (to me) information on the prize payout for this event:

Capablanca-Alekhine World Championship Match (1927)

This is different from the proposed payout by the <London Rules 1922> agreement, which I currently have in the Mirror draft: Game Collection: WCC: Capablanca-Alekhine 1927

Since <Chessical's> source is contemporaneous with the actual payout of the prize fund <Aberdeen Journal - p.8; Saturday 10 December 1927>, I'm inclined to replace my current text about the payout with his new information.

I saw the discussion and I'm not convinced yet. That's basically one newspaper report claiming otherwise, so far.

It seems that the 10,000 -> 2,000 for Capablanca and 60% winner / 40% loser were agreed upon before. So they must have changed the conditions at the end? Else, Capablanca would have gotten more, even though he lost.

Now that the footnotes are back again:

"5 Wiener Schachzeitung, 1904, page 364."

This is the December issue. Link: http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a...

"10 Tarrasch, S. Der Schachwettkampf Lasker-Marshall 1907. cited in Wiener Schachzeitung, 1907, page 163."

This is the May-July issue. Link: http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a...

Furthermore, something's wrong with the footnotes as source 10 is not in the text, but is the source for <“In the worst situations he knows no panic, and his defense is strong at all times, with a drop of poison always contained in his defensive moves.”9>

"(10) Ost und West, March 1910, pages 171-176"

Retrieved in http://www.compactmemory.de/index_p...

and Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Janowski 1910

"9 "Ost und West", December 1910, p. 825"

Retrieved in http://www.compactmemory.de/index_p...

In this case, I also don't know how to cite specific pages on the <Compact Memory> website.

Possibly we could ask this question in the Biographer's Bistro?

At any rate, even if the weblink doesn't show the exact page, I favor adding the weblink to each of the sources you mention.

I'll get back to you on Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Marshall 1907

As you may have noticed, <Our Man in Havana> has announced his return to <CG.com>, and I think he is best suited to examine the issues you raise, since it's his draft.

I agree, and I'm fixing it now.

On both links, I arrived at a page with this text on the top:

<Ost und West
Illustrierte Monatsschrift für modernes Judentum
Illustrierte Monatsschrift für das gesamte Judentum

Organ der Deutschen Conferenz-Gemeinschaft der Alliance Israélite Universelle Organ der Alliance Israélite Universelle>

Thomastonk just mentioned that our beloved KRANTEN will discontinue - that is, move to a new home: http://www.delpher.nl/

So I've decided to download all of the KRANTENS you lads have lent us. That way, since I have the physical copies, same as if I had a physical book, there's no need to give a web link.

Though if the web links are indeed resurrected, then if "we" wanted to "we" could re-find the weblinks and add them for "reader convenience.

*cough*

Actually I wouldn't ask you to do such extra work on work you've already done.

I have the KRANTENS, I'm downloading the KRANTENS. Actually I was dumb not to have downloaded them all when you guys originally posted them- then they'd already be sorted in easy to find folders and such.

So far I have already downloaded the "Three KRANTENS" that I actually cited for the drafts Game Collection: WCC: Alekhine-Euwe 1935 and Game Collection: WCC: Euwe-Alekhine Rematch 1937.

Now, the hard part (because I'm a poor bookkeeper).

I'm trying to come up with the simplest possible way to download all the EXTRA KRANTENS whilst keeping track of what they actually say and their actual names/dates/page numbers.

Because I don't know how much we should trust in weblinks. Generally I don't expect them to keep working - but I figured the Dutch Library wouldn't go offline. Sure they didn't go offline, but they moved. I'm not really sure why.

So you know, how sure can we be this new site still exists in 25 years? Sure, it's official, but perhaps by then it has merged with some bigger library thing and moved again.

Downloading them is a fine plan indeed.

Well yes agreed.

The best thing of all is to actually "have" the physical article or book. That's the beauty of these generous European websites that actually allow you to download precious newspapers and chess magazines.

As for the "Our Man in Delph" series, I'm of two minds on that.

1. The weblinks are really handy for the punter, because then she can view the copy as well, without having to come over to our houses to look at the actual sources.

2. The weblinks all too frequently disappear or change address. So even in the best case, someone has to monitor the weblinks and keep them updated. I don't see that happening with our present project. One of the reasons I started loudly, (and rudely I might add) bleating about the current WCC intros was that most of the non-Wiki web references were dead links. Some of those links still existed but had "changed address." I know because I refound some of the <Graeme Cree> links. But these links hadn't been "maintained." Someone really does has to check them regularly.

So I'll ask you this question, and of course our <Esteemed Clams> are (not only tasty but also) invited to give their opinion as well.